What Are U.S. Forces Doing in Niger Anyway?

For five years, U.S. forces operated under the radar—until four of them were killed.

A U.S. Army trainer coaches a Republic of Niger soldier on marksmanship techniques at an AK-47 qualification range near Agadez, Niger. (U.S. Army Africa photo by Spc. Craig Philbrick)

On October 4, four U.S. troops and five Nigerians were killed in ambush by heavily armed ISIS-affiliated fighters near the restive Mali border in Niger. While the press has been obsessed with how President Donald Trump has handled it politically back home, it’s important to note that this event not only marked the first U.S. combat deaths in Niger, but the first public revelation that the Pentagon was carrying out anything close to combat operations there at all.

That isn’t to say that we didn’t know the U.S. had troops in Niger. In February of 2015, U.S. African Command announced a deployment of troops for asmall training operation. But it wasn’t meant to be permanent. More so, it was never widely conveyed, at least publicly, that Special Forces would be engaging in joint military patrols on the Mali border, a known stomping ground for multiple Islamist factions. This, according to reports, is what the Green Berets were doing when they were ambushed.

In that incident, 12 U.S. troops were reportedly leaving a meeting with local leaders and were walking back to unarmored vehicles when they came under fire from 50 Islamists with small arms, machine guns, and rocket-propelled grenades. Though outgunned the Green Berets engaged in a firefight lasting about 30 minutes before the French military came to the rescue with fighter jets, eventually scaring the ISIS-affiliated fighters away (they reportedly did not have authority to shoot). The French forces then came in with helicopters to fly out the dead and wounded.

Three U.S. soldiers were reported killed and two wounded that day, and two days later it was announced a fourth was found dead after a lengthy recovery operation.

“This was a hard fight, this was a very tough fight,” Secretary of Defense James Mattis told reporters last week.

Why were they outgunned? It could be that the mission had been set up as “low risk” when team leaders got the go-ahead to move forward on the patrols in the first place, according to sources quoted by the New York Times. This is clearly troubling, however, when one considers the Mali-Niger border region is known to be teeming with multiple Islamist factions. That appears to be why the U.S. is there, though there has been no real conversation in Washington, much less in the public forum, about the role there.

Turns out that for five years Niger has been a toe in the expanding American footprint in Africa, and has become a hub of U.S. military activity (about 800 soldiers are serving as advisors and training local forces there now) and, according to Nick Turse, the location of a brand new $100 million drone base. Meanwhile, the region has become a crossroads of Islamist activity, from Boko Haram in Nigeria to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb across the Sahel. And now, apparently, ISIS.

While some reporters have sought to find scandal in President Trump’s reaction to the troop deaths, there’s been little to no concern about the U.S. putting troops in combat situations in Niger in the first place, ostensibly to “train and advise,” and then keeping it largely out of the press.

Niger is far from the exception. In March 2012, the Pentagon confirmed that U.S. troops were attacked in the southern Yemeni city of Aden, and that a CIA officer was killed. This was the first time officials confirmed that the U.S. had ground troops operating inside Yemen at all. The revelation is even more stunning when one recalls that the White House publicly ruled out sending ground troops to Yemen several times in the years leading up to this admission.

During his August 21 speech on Afghanistan, President Trump cautioned that “America’s enemies must never know our plans.” This was presented at the time as a reason for not giving any specifics about how the Afghan war’s escalation was to proceed, but also appears to be a driving policy goal for the administration, likely at the behest of the Pentagon—secrecy at all cost.

Given the Pentagon’s long history of being less than candid with the American public, making secrecy a government-wide goal suggests what happened in Niger was not an oversight, nor likely to be a unique situation for the world’s largest military, which has troops in myriad countries—at last count 138—often doing God knows what.

Even in obvious, known war zones, like Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan, the Pentagon often plays semantics games with its missions, regularly defining troops in the middle of firefights to be “advisors” or “trainers.” It’s rare indeed for the Pentagon to acknowledge that any of its troops are in “combat duty” anywhere. Nothing ensures limited coverage of a U.S. war like rebranding it a training operation, and apart from the casualties that inevitably follow, little to suggest to the casual observer that America is actually engaged in combat there.

This is doubly true in places like Niger, where the original reports of deployments were so deceptively downplayed by the Pentagon that few media outlets bothered to cover them. The presence of U.S. troops was, if not a secret, not exactly a widely known fact. With troop numbers and operational details kept from the public, America can be, and in fact is, engaged in secret wars without any public oversight.

Keeping the “enemy” from knowing our plans has become so vague, with so many deployments around that world, that who the enemy even is has to remain unspoken, so it can change on a whim, or as U.S. patrols happen to stumble into new fights. And when they do, the 2002 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) serves as the blanket authority to engage in combat.

Niger provides a terrifying reminder of how far we are from being an informed American public that serves as a check and balance on what our military is doing in our name. We can’t have a debate on U.S. intervention overseas if we don’t even know where are our forces are, let alone to what end.

Jason Ditz is news editor at Antiwar.com, a nonprofit organization dedicated to the cause of non-interventionism. His work has appeared in Forbes, the Toronto Star, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Providence Journal, the Daily Caller, The American Conservative, the Washington Times and the Detroit Free Press.

My goodness. I am certain our congressmen will open a full and thorough investigation of what happened to these 4 servicemen in Niger. Did they have air/ground support? Were they just left there to die? I am also certain all Americans need to know what happened in Niger.

Americans were killed in Libya, a known war zone of America’s making. Such blowback is not unimaginable when one country disposes another country’s long time leader. However we are in Niger why?

I am amazed that anyone who readily reads TAC is amazed. The US ha force all over the globe many if not most, until 2001, were engaged in humanitarian missions.

I don’t think we need an investigation. Unlike Benhgazi, we are in Africa for two reasons.

1. Certainly to support democracy.

2. The continent remains a vast resource for yapped and untapped minerals

We blew the opportunity as the colonial powers collapsed by making nearly every government system attempting to establish any semblance of sanity after the European made a mess of it. China during the gap China has been filling the void.

I am sure I will get better at this – but when is a legitimate question.

We blew the opportunity as the colonial powers collapsed by making nearly every government system attempting to establish any semblance of sanity after the European made a mess of it – as communists. China during the gap been filling the void.

This article gets it completely. This is the big question. Why in God’s name are American troops in NIGER now?

I’m sick of voting for “Tea Party” congressmen who are supposedly going to hold government accountable, then learning after the fact that they let the president do something like this. It seems like Obama sent them in there and Trump won’t pull them out.

I’m one of the central Virginians who voted for Dave Brat over Eric Cantor, and by God I want answers.

Why are you letting Trump send Americans to their deaths in Niger, Congressman? What really happened over there? I thought you were an America First guy! WAKE THE HELL UP AND DO YOUR JOB!

Even a “known war zone” like Libya was not the cite of a legally declared war.

We have had no legally declared war since WWII. (We can argue about Korea later.) The Constitutional practice of subjecting wars to Congressional oversight ahead of time (or, really, ever) has fallen into disuse, in favor of undeclared wars, “police actions”, “training and consultation” with foreign forces (who are ordinarily engaged in a civil war) and the like. This makes it easy for the executive branch and the Pentagon to hold wars without asking the people of this country for our blessing on this endeavor, undoubtedly because they understand very clearly that they are most unlikely to get it.

All such action should cease, the sooner the better. We have no business making war in Niger. We are not at war with the government nor with any group in Niger. We should immediately bring all these troops home and allow the people of Niger to settle their own problems.

Some event need investigation, because we really don;t know what happened. But the record is pretty clear here.

As opposed to not knowing our plan it’s clear the enemy knew exactly what was up and proceeded to act.

Calling for an investigation, when there will be full after action report, overly redundant and unnecessary. . Congress is not going to start withdrawing troops in the fight on ‘terror’.

I think we are a lot of place fighting terror we shouldn’t be. Trying make a federal case out of something that i well known and why – calling for an investigation when the answer is readily available —

Couldn’t be clearer now, isn’t it, that the public has absolutely no control over what the government’s deep state elements choose to do. Visibility zero, accountibility zero.

Whatever amorphous form it’s taken, our system is no longer democratic in a meaningful, practical way. Instead of disclosure, we get propaganda, with any truth that happens to emerge, branded “fake news.”

Re comment posted above:
1. Certainly to support democracy.
No democracy in USA fella. Your vote is meaningless. Both parties take turns like clock work every 8 years cycle. first terms are a shoe on.
poor Jimmy Carter a real saint got the boot after one term because the Chosen ones hated him because he wanted Palestinian issue resolved. Stop with the lies. Call it Demockracy for a change :^(

Some of you need to learn to read. US troops have been stationed in Niger for the past five years. My math skills tell me the 44th President was in office and approved the deployments to Niger four years before the 45th President was sworn in to office.

I have issues with our forces being stationed in sub-Saharan Africa, the Horn of Africa, etc, and the Middle East.

Sad to say, but it seems overwhelmingly likely to me that Trump didn’t even know we were in Niger.

I think he only found out we had troops there when these four men were killed.

Unfortunately, because they were there, and because it’s on his watch that they were killed, and because he’s Donald Trump who is never wrong about anything, he’s now probably going to double down on our presence there, when what he should be doing is finding and firing the Obama throwbacks who got us in there and then getting us the hell out of there.

Thank God the French showed up in time to save the other American troops in Niger.

We can’t expect our own overstretched military to protect its own. Not when we’re spread all over the place doing the heavy lifting for foreign parasites like Saudi Arabia and Israel, who can call the tune because they meddled in American politics and bought our Congressmen, Senators, and President.

These men are trying to train Nigerian soldiers, and got caught in a outmanned, outgunned firefight against the very terrorists that President Trump is trying to eliminate. There will be repercussions for these deaths, no doubt, but if we question every action in the “War against Terrorism” then we do our President and those in the Military knowledge of these events a dis-service. The American people pulled out of Iraq, only to have ISIS fill the void. These guys use guerilla tactics. They are undertrained, and use numbers and weapons against elite, well-trained US military. If we want to get rid of terrorism, then we have to be on site, where this scum operates. Quit second guessing the people that know a lot more about what is going on than we do. It is tragic to lose our men. The grief and the loss is extreme. But thank God we have men and women willing to put their lives on the line to fight this even. We don’t need knee-jerk reactions about something we don’t want shared with the enemy.

Obviously Even Pres. Obama realized the serious danger of this area becoming the “new” center of Islamic Terrorism from which to operate across the world to spread and attack and that means the US first and foremost we are the Great Satan to them make no mistake and they are not shy in this world about that goal, the point is to stop it as the cross road for Africa and most of all for our Nation and our security.

“No democracy in USA fella. Your vote is meaningless. Both parties take turns like clock work every 8 years cycle. first terms are a shoe on.’

I guess we could debate the merits of voting, republic verses a direct system. But the parties exist because people support them. I would there are more viable options, I think that time i coming until then what we have is what we have and they matter. If they didn’t, if my vote didn’t count, there would be no squabbling.

While I would challenge the suggestion that were a democracy before the full inclusion of native americans, I think that it’s a safe bet that votes count, including my own.

“I still want to know why American troops are policing the French Empire.”

As noted above it’s minerals. It’s a safe bet that there are untapped minerals in the region. It is also a democracy – it is no longer apart of the French colonial rule. It is a free and independent state. And it’s youth, recovering from colonial rule, make it susceptible to various groups seeking control of the region including Muslims. Under the suspicion of international terrorism, joint operations the US is supporting a fledgling state.

This is not the same interventions in which the US violates a state’s sovereignty against her will, i.e.:

Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanisthn the US is not making war.

surely,

Niger should figure a way to get more for her resources. This is the state referenced in the infamous (manufactured) “yellow cake” letter, for war agaisnt Iraq

I think the military’s running out of control. They’ve got troops in places that nobody knew they were there and most Americans never heard of. It’s incredible. Who the f*** is in charge? One thing’s for sure – letting generals make the decisions isn’t working out for us. All they do is say give us more money, more men. And now we’re fighting wars all over the place. Generals always do that. Trump’s got to stop kissing these generals’ asses and start kicking their asses instead. They’re screwing up big time.

These guys didn’t die in combat in Niger, they were (according to news reports) trying to track down an accomplice of one Abu Adnan al-Sahraoui. In other words they were doing police work in a foreign country, an absolutely ridiculous task which they were not trained or able to do and which put their lives needlessly in danger. This criticism applies to the whole “war on terror” which has proven to be a tragic farce (if there can be such a thing).

Oh,ya to you folks who are bemoaning the fact you did not know our soldiers were in Niger or else where,what in thunder would you come up with to read this world of the absolute ISIS threat that exists.First does Isis tell everyone in the world that on a certain date,time and place they are going to trick and kill any number of innocent people.All the military or the white house would have to do is tell you bleeding hearts about a specific action and the world would know all of the details in short order.If a group like ISIS is to be wiped out we have to play their game only better. So go have a good sleep tonight knowing that the President and our military are taking care of business as they should.

We’re in Niger, and other places in the neighborhood because Obama/Clinton had the grand idea to oust Khadafi from Libya. Well done. The utter chaos as the Libyan government fell and it’s army disintegrated left a huge vacuum mostly full of weapons that attracted radicals being squeezed out of the Middle East as well as ‘liberating’ the home grown ones that Col Khadafi had successfully kept down. Add Coup’s in Mali and Central African Republic (CAR) and you have a massive destabilization of the entirety of Niger and the Lake Chad Basin. Since ungoverned spaces are where terrorists have haven’s to plan, it’s in our interests to assist in stabilizing these places. Why? Two reasons. 1. the next big terrorist event will likely be planned in this area. 2. The chaos has spurred massive sub-Saharan African migration thru Libya to Europe. Italy has received over 100K Africans just this year and Austria & France have closed their borders to them. The migrant crisis has put RW parties in the parliament of Germany for the 1st time in 70yrs, FN is rising in France and Austria just elected a 31yr old far right pol as it’s next chancellor. All are Anti EU. Brexit is a fact that was made possible by the migrant crisis, others may soon follow and as goes the EU, so goes NATO. Special forces frequently train national forces in very out of the way places world wide, this is no different. As to the article, the author finds a few facts and bends them to a breathless narrative to suit his propose.

@turbo – what you’re basically saying is that we’ve got to keep sending US troops into new countries because of the failures associated with having used military force previously in other places.

We’ve got to be in Niger because we were in Libya and we had to be in Libya to get rid of Khadafy and we had to help the Saudis wreck Yemen to stop Iran from spreading into Iraq which we invaded because we had to stop them from using WMDs that they didn’t have and we have to wreck Syria to punish Assad and we have to send troops back into Afghanistan where it all started because bin Laden attacked us over our Israel policy and we didn’t get all the Taliban back in the 2000s and now ISIS is there too, and Etc Etc Etc

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

The bottom line is that these policies don’t protect us from anything. We were safer before we allowed ourselves to get dragged into all these Middle Eastern messes. We should be getting out and letting people with more skin in the game, more basic competence, and more local knowledge do the fighting, dying, and paying.

I’m tired of reading about dead Americans in the Middle East. Every time I read about a dead American in the Middle East I think “That should have been a dead Saudi, or a dead Israeli, or a dead Egyptian, a dead Turk, or at worst a dead European. Why, after sixteen years, are Americans still dying in these places?”

EliteCommInc. says:
October 20, 2017 at 1:50 pm
“I am sure I will get better at this – but when is a legitimate question.

We blew the opportunity as the colonial powers collapsed by making nearly every government system attempting to establish any semblance of sanity after the European made a mess of it – as communists. China during the gap been filling the void.”

OK, Let me help, the problem is that you made the US the subject and gave us two predicates (sort of, its a little hard to sort out clearly), blew it, and making nearly every government system. But you made the last predicate finish by telling us what the objects (every government system…) did (sort of) but not what the subject did. Yes, I am an English teacher, why do you ask?). So we are left with an unanswered question. How did we blow it? What role should we have played that we didn’t? Trying to get this across in one sentence is probably not a good idea. Write a paragraph. Thanks for the practice. This was much easier than critiquing and correcting most of my students work, it was kind of refreshing.

Unmentioned in many articles is the fact that France gets a significant amount of uranium for their nuclear industry from Niger.
The overthrow of the Kaddafi government led to a proliferation of weapons to militant groups. I wouldn’t be surprised if China is feeding the fires of war in the region as well.

I wish our representatives would persistently ask their constituents (in Town Halls, for example) why they think it is in their interest that they are allowing their fellow citizens (and family members) to be “in harms’s way” in 138 countries. Afterwards, they might ask whether they would prefer the $100000000 (hundred million) of investment in central Niger to be redirected somewhere closer to home. My expectation is that the status would not be sustained if reality were broadly visible, and my fear is that our democracy utterly depends upon an unfettered free press.

“Furbo – what you’re basically saying is that we’ve got to keep sending US troops into new countries because of the failures associated with having used military force previously in other places”

Good lord no. I was a US Troop until last May and my kid is in basic. I’m just trying to explain the reasoning behind the policy because the DoD hasn’t done a good job of it. And, in case I wasn’t clear, I think the Libya operation was stupidity on a stick.

The author’s thoughts are suspect, as some of his allegations are false — we Americans haven’t the world’s largest (or even second-largest) armed forces, for example. I believe that there is more wisdom in several readers’ comments here: that the situation largely arose because of the Obaman destruction of Libya, which itself likely was sold for a modest donation to the Clinton Foundation.

@Wagrien“The author’s thoughts are suspect, as some of his allegations are false — we Americans haven’t the world’s largest (or even second-largest) armed forces, for example.”

You’re probably right if you’re talking about men under arms. Countries like China or India will always be bigger on that score.

But we sure as hell have the most expensive military in the world.

We spend more on our military than anyone on earth. More than the next eight biggest spending countries combined.

Considering our size, our real needs, and (sorry to say) the increasingly poor performance we’re seeing, both the military and “national security state” spinoffs like Homeland Security are starting to look like giant ripoffs. Maybe the biggest ripoffs in history. Because, despite spending more on the military and “national security” than anyone has ever spent, the government tells us year in and year out that we’re in greater danger than we’ve ever been.

A big part of the reason has to be that we keep sticking our arm into hornet nests. Like Niger. And Afghanistan. Iraq. Syria. Yemen. South Sudan. Somalia. Pakistan. Waziristan.

We ought to get the hell out and let somebody else handle it. We did our bit, using the most expensive, best-armed, best-trained military in human history.

An Army special forces officer has been murdered in Mali. The suspects, however, aren’t Al Qaeda or ISIS. No, the suspects in the US Army special forces officer’s murder are US Navy Seals. Seal Team Six, no less.